The Impact of Double All-Americans

by NYCCats on Jan 24, 2009 11:16 AM EST Comment 20 comments

There has been much recent (justified) chatter that UK may have two All-Americans on its team right now - Meeks and Patterson. While individual accolades are nice, I'm sure all Kentucky fans are much more concerned with how the team does. So how have teams that have had two All-Americans done where it matters the most - the NCAA tournament?

Let's look at the data.

I went back over the last 20 years, and used the AP All-American 1st-3rd teams. I ignored Honorable Mention. Looking at the raw data, there were 30 sets of double (or more) All-Americans. Only two years did not have a team that doubled up - '03-'04 and '95-96. Out of this raw data, there were 3 occurrences of triple All-Americans, which I will exclude for this analysis. Additionally, there are two "outliers" that I will also toss from the data set - Indiana last year (during the middle of their implosion), and Loyola Marymount in '89-'90 (gimmicky offense, mid-major conference, Hank Gathers factor). So that leaves us with 25 good data points, which are presented below (excluded data points also shown below for completeness).

Year	School	All-American (Team)	NCAA Seed	Finish
07-08	UCLA	Love (1), Collison (3)	1	Nat'l Semi
	Memphis	Douglas-Roberts (1), Rose (3)	1	Final
	Indiana	White (2), Gordon (3)	8	1st Round
06-07	Florida	Noah (2), Horford (3)	1	Champion
05-06	Duke	Redick (1), Williams (1)	1	Sweet 16
	Villanova	Foye (1), Ray (3)	1	Elite 8
04-05	Illinois	Head (2), Brown (2), Williams (3)	1	Final
	Duke	Redick (1), Williams (3)	1	Sweet 16
03-04		None
02-03	Kansas	Collison (1), Hinrich (3)	2	Final
01-02	Duke	Williams (1), Dunleavy (2), Boozer (3)	1	Sweet 16
00-01	Duke	Battier (1), Williams (1)	1	Champion
	Mich St	Richardson (2), Bell (3)	1	Nat'l Semi
99-00	Duke	Battier (2), Carrawell (2)	1	Sweet 16
	Mich St	Peterson (2), Cleaves (2)	1	Champion
98-99	Duke	Brand (1), Langdon (2)	1	Final
97-98	Arizona	Bibby (1), Simon (1), Dickerson (3)	1	Elite 8
	Kansas	LaFrentz (1), Pierce (1)	1	Elite 8
	UNC	Jamison (1), Carter (2)	1	Nat'l Semi
96-97	Kansas	LaFrentz (1), Vaughn (2)	1	Sweet 16
95-96		None
94-95	Wake Forest	Childress (2), Duncan (3)	1	Sweet 16
	UNC	Stackhouse (1), Wallace (2)	2	Nat'l Semi
93-94	Michigan	Rose (2), Howard (3)	3	Elite 8
92-93	Duke	Hurley (1), Hill (3)	3	2nd Round
91-92	Duke	Laettner (1), Hurley (3)	1	Champion
	Arkansas	Day (3), Mayberry (3)	3	2nd Round
90-91	UNLV	Augmon (1), Johnson (1)	1	Nat'l Semi
89-90	Loy. Marymt.	Kimble (2), Gathers (3)	11	Elite 8
	Georgia Tech	Scott (2), Anderson (3)	4	Nat'l Semi
88-89	Oklahoma	King (1), Blaylock (2)	1	Sweet 16
	Georgetown	Smith (2), Mourning (3)	1	Elite 8

Of the 25 teams, the lowest seed received was a #4 by Georgia Tech in '89-'90, and that team made it all the way to the Final Four. A whopping 19 teams (76%) received a #1 seed. So clearly, a double All-American team is usually one of the elite regular season teams.

As for the tournament itself, these results are slightly more variable, as one would expect. Four teams (16%) went on to win the title. The earliest exits were in the second round twice - Arkansas in '91-'92 as a #3 seed, and Duke also as a #3 seed a year later. What I find most interesting is 13 teams went on to the Final Four - that means the median finish (half above, half below) was a berth in the National Semis.

So what does this mean for Kentucky? At first cut, nothing, since each year and situation is independent. Likewise, this analysis does not address whether two All-Americans is causative (if you have two All-Americans, you will do well), or correlative (teams with two All-Americans also typically do well).

But it does show that the vast majority of teams that had two All-Americans are usually very good teams. If UK truly does have two All-Americans on its hands, this should be a very successful season, despite what other limitations we may have. I'm sure most of these teams cited above had some flaws, but yet were able to overcome them due to their two studs.

Will Kentucky buck the trend? Will we have two All-Americans but have a ho-hum regular season followed by an early tournament exit? Perhaps, but the historical analysis says that would be an extremely unlikely event. GO CATS!!

2 recs | Comment 20 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Very interesting piece...

The data seems to suggest at least a Sweet 16 and probably better. As you stated, every season is different so who knows but this makes a good case for a few wins in the tourney. Nicely done.

Slower Traffic Keep Right!

by SevenRings on Jan 24, 2009 12:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Kentucky 1996 Or 1998

1 All-American (Delk) in 1996, 0 in 1998.

1 A-A in 1997 and 1993 also.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 24, 2009 2:41 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

something that gets lost in the shuffle

it has been the longest stretch ever without an all-american for UK. a trend that will end this year.

i don’t think it is a coincidence that it is also the longest stretch without a final four.

by schizm42 on Jan 24, 2009 6:05 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

here is a link

http://www.bigbluehistory.net/bb/Statistics/AllAmerican.html

by schizm42 on Jan 24, 2009 6:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Since The Late 1940's And Early 1950's

When Double All-Americans were commonplace at UK, it’s a pretty rare event for Kentucky.

1966, Dampier and Riley.

1978, Givens, Robey, and Macy.

1984, Bowie and Turpin.

Not in 1993, 96, 97, or 98.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 25, 2009 7:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

UK's Last FF Appearance (1998)

No A-A that year, either.

Jon Scott has Padgett listed wrong. He was Wooden A-A in 1999.

The 2005 UK team came within a referee’s whistle and a couple of missed rebounds of making FF. No A-A on that team but that had no impact on not making FF.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 24, 2009 6:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

True,

but scott padgett was an all-american caliber player, as evidenced by his later selection.

and as close as we were in 2005 (and a few times in tubby’s tenure) I can’t count them as final four appearances because we didn’t get there (even if we were capable of doing so)

by schizm42 on Jan 26, 2009 1:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, Then Why Not Count Prince In 1999 And 2000?

Or Bogans in 2000-01-02. Both were later selected A-A ergo they were A-A caliber players.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 26, 2009 5:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

fair enough.

by schizm42 on Jan 26, 2009 7:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

however, it is also the longest stretch that we have been without 1st team all americans.

I didn’t mean to imply that we can’t go the the final four without all americans, but it is one indicator of attracting and developing talent… something we have been poor at over the last 10 years – compared to our history dating back to the 1930s.

by schizm42 on Jan 26, 2009 7:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Actually Last 20 Years

UK acquired far more All-American caliber talent in 70’s and 80’s than 90’s or 2K’s.

UK had 3 players make A-A teams in 90’s and 2 more in 2K’s. Those # are far lower than 70’s and 80’s.

I suggest you actually study UK history.

The past 10 years (I presume you meant 1998 through 2007) attracted 7 McDonalds A-A and 10 Parade A-A recruits. And 2 of those players made A-A teams. Numerous of them made All-SEC teams. Quite a few made the NBA and/or were drafted by an NBA team.

The 10 years before that (1988 through 1997), UK signed 6 McDonalds A-A and 12 Parade A-A recruits. 3 of those players made A-A teams. Numerous of them made All-SEC teams. Quite a few made the NBA and/or were drafted by an NBA team.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 26, 2009 7:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Specifically 5 A-A In 1970's And 4 In 1980's

Compared to 3 in 90’s and 2 in 2K’s.

UK signed 18 HS All-Americans in 70’s and 18 more HS A-A in 1980’s.

UK signed 13 HS All-Americans in 90’s and 10 more HS A-A in 2K’s.

Note: HS A-A = Parade or McDonalds A-A.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 26, 2009 7:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

hmm

I wasn’t talking about HS all americans, but I concede the point.

While I feel I do have a good grasp of UK history, there is always more to learn =)

by schizm42 on Jan 27, 2009 11:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I Listed Both College A-A and HS A-A

UK had 5 players made College A-A in 70’s and 4 in 80’s.

Dropped off to 3 (making College A-A) in 90’s and 2 (so far) in 2K’s.

Yet UK experienced MUCH GREATER success in the latter decades than the former decades.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 27, 2009 12:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Preposterous And Prejudiced

Saying the absence of an A-A had no effect on making The Final Four is pure conjecture and faulty logic. Who’s to say that the presence of an A-A wouldn’t have affected seeding thus resulting in different match ups, and that is just one of a nearly infinite number of scenarios including securing that elusive rebound that Smith apologists eternally use to justify his failure to lead UK to The Final Four in 9 years. What’s even worse about the statement is that it is prejudiced in its thinly veiled attempt to portray the Smith-era — especially bringing top talent to the University — in a much better light than it deserves and not so coincidentally derogate the accomplishments of the current coach.

by Wild Weasel on Jan 26, 2009 9:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Absolute Facts

1998-2007 = 263-83 and 23-9 in NCAA games.

1988-1997 = 259-75 and 24-6 in NCAA games.

UK had no A-A in 1998 yet not only made FF but won NC that year. That’s 0 A-A in 98.

UK had A-A on its roster in 2001, 02, and 03 but did not make FF any of those years. 2 Sweet 16 and Elite 8 though.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 26, 2009 10:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think a 4 seed or better

and a Sweet 16 appearance are very doable for this team. Win SEC regular season and at least make it to the SECT championship game and I think UK should lock a 4 seed. Although doubtful, if the Cats win out the rest of the season I think we should end with a 2 or 3 seed.

The real problem I see with regards to the tourney is the Gillespie Effect. If he plays the starters 38 minutes a game and practices every day and before every game, they will be worn out by the Sweet 16.

the REAL fake Mr. Bob Dobalina
Formerly known as "senowen"

by bluesquire on Jan 24, 2009 11:59 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I remember reading

that once the conference season starts, the game-day practices become less intense.

Also, I don’t buy that they will be more tired. Instead, they will be in better condition. NBA players are almost the same age and play much more and much longer than college players, especially given the rules they have limiting practice time during the semester.

Since the training is primarily cardio with muscle training added in, they should only be getting in better shape unless they are injured and the extra training is making an injury worse.

by schizm42 on Jan 26, 2009 1:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs